Message boards :
Theory Application :
Maybe abnormally low credits for Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2699 v3
Message board moderation
Author | Message |
---|---|
Send message Joined: 18 Nov 17 Posts: 119 Credit: 51,299,634 RAC: 20,988 |
https://lhcathome.cern.ch/lhcathome/result.php?resultid=290754666 CPU type: GenuineIntel Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2699 v3 @ 2.30GHz [Family 6 Model 63 Stepping 2] Run time: 3 hours 58 min 31 sec CPU time: 3 hours 49 min 52 sec Credits: 33.13 Why so less credits? The same device running SixTrack, for example, give me about 5 times more... All tasks running Theory at this device give me almost no credits... |
Send message Joined: 2 May 07 Posts: 2071 Credit: 156,157,412 RAC: 105,757 |
You can do a Benchmark-Test in Boinc: Your task of Theory show: max. FLOPS des Gerätes 1.00 GFLOPS Maybe the stats are not correct. |
Send message Joined: 18 Nov 17 Posts: 119 Credit: 51,299,634 RAC: 20,988 |
Task page shows device peak of 1.00 GFLOPS Device page shows 3.42 GFLOPS BOINC manager shows 3.2 GFLOPS Device page and BOINC manager GFLOPS looks like true... Information on Task page looks incorrect on my opinion... |
Send message Joined: 2 May 07 Posts: 2071 Credit: 156,157,412 RAC: 105,757 |
In the cpu_list this Computer is not shown: https://lhcathome.cern.ch/lhcathome/cpu_list.php Maybe, every CPU need some Computer to build a normal GFlops per task? |
Send message Joined: 18 Nov 17 Posts: 119 Credit: 51,299,634 RAC: 20,988 |
Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2699 v3 really is not in list. I run it about 2 weeks only, but It can't be I'm the first participant with this CPU. Why this CPU is not in list? If I'm first indeed, when it will be included in list? |
Send message Joined: 18 Nov 17 Posts: 119 Credit: 51,299,634 RAC: 20,988 |
Device peak of 1.00 GFLOPS is too accurate value to be true |
Send message Joined: 2 May 07 Posts: 2071 Credit: 156,157,412 RAC: 105,757 |
If I'm first indeed, when it will be included in list? At the end of the list is the update-time and day. Only once a day. |
Send message Joined: 18 Nov 17 Posts: 119 Credit: 51,299,634 RAC: 20,988 |
At the end of the list is the update-time and day. So, my CPU should be included in list many days ago. Oh... |
Send message Joined: 2 May 07 Posts: 2071 Credit: 156,157,412 RAC: 105,757 |
This CPU-list is a part of the Boinc-System. Other projects have this list also included. |
Send message Joined: 18 Nov 17 Posts: 119 Credit: 51,299,634 RAC: 20,988 |
This CPU-list is a part of the Boinc-System. Meanwhile, Einstein evaluate my CPU correctly: 3208.77 million ops/sec |
Send message Joined: 2 May 07 Posts: 2071 Credit: 156,157,412 RAC: 105,757 |
Then we need a ticket for support ;-) |
Send message Joined: 18 Nov 17 Posts: 119 Credit: 51,299,634 RAC: 20,988 |
Then we need a ticket for support ;-) Yes :-) It's not comfortable to run with no credits :-) |
Send message Joined: 18 Nov 17 Posts: 119 Credit: 51,299,634 RAC: 20,988 |
Now I have the same problem on another one of my PC with Intel(R) Core(TM) i3-4130 CPU @ 3.40GHz [Family 6 Model 60 Stepping 3]: https://lhcathome.cern.ch/lhcathome/show_host_detail.php?hostid=10675225 Computer's page and Theory task's pages shows wrong device peak of 1.00 GFLOPS. And I have abnormally low credits for Theory on this PC too. This processor is in this list: https://lhcathome.cern.ch/lhcathome/cpu_list.php According to the list GFLOPS per core must be 3.91. BOINC manager benchmark shows 3.8 GFLOPS per core. P.S. SixTrack credits are correct. |
Send message Joined: 18 Nov 17 Posts: 119 Credit: 51,299,634 RAC: 20,988 |
Now I have the same problem on another one of my PC with O !!! Everything is fine on another one of my PC with THE SAME CPU: https://lhcathome.cern.ch/lhcathome/show_host_detail.php?hostid=10570965 With older versions of Windows, BOINC and VirtualBox... Seems like not CPU is a reason. |
Send message Joined: 15 Jun 08 Posts: 2386 Credit: 222,965,743 RAC: 136,675 |
It is known for years that credits per computer can go up or down by magnitudes all of a sudden even if a user didn't change anything. LHC@home uses BOINC's credit system which is explained here: https://boinc.berkeley.edu/trac/wiki/CreditAlt https://boinc.berkeley.edu/trac/wiki/CreditGeneralized https://boinc.berkeley.edu/trac/wiki/CreditNew https://boinc.berkeley.edu/trac/wiki/CreditNotes https://boinc.berkeley.edu/trac/wiki/CreditOptions https://boinc.berkeley.edu/trac/wiki/CreditProposal Suggestions and complaints should be made here: https://boinc.berkeley.edu https://github.com/BOINC/boinc |
Send message Joined: 18 Nov 17 Posts: 119 Credit: 51,299,634 RAC: 20,988 |
Thank you. Wrong device peak of 1.00 GFLOPS should be ignored too? |
Send message Joined: 15 Jun 08 Posts: 2386 Credit: 222,965,743 RAC: 136,675 |
... device peak of 1.00 GFLOPS should be ignored too? You may run BOINC benchmarks, then contact the project server. Already downloaded tasks do not update the GFLOPS value. |
Send message Joined: 18 Nov 17 Posts: 119 Credit: 51,299,634 RAC: 20,988 |
... device peak of 1.00 GFLOPS should be ignored too? Thank you, I'll try this. |
Send message Joined: 18 Nov 17 Posts: 119 Credit: 51,299,634 RAC: 20,988 |
... device peak of 1.00 GFLOPS should be ignored too? computezrmle, thank you! It worked out. |
©2024 CERN